Elon Musk proved that sometimes you don't need 80% of the workforce working part-time while getting paid full time.
Ipads are 100X more entertaining then a parent. They are great at keeping kids quiet and calm.aTmAg said:Then you are patently incorrect.texagbeliever said:I think this is patently untrue.aTmAg said:
If it's true that AI is better at a task than a human and at a lower price, then AI SHOULD do it. It will momentarily suck for that human, but in the long run it is better for society as a whole (and that human).
This is the same 150 year argument against automation which has been proven wrong time and time again by reality.
A person doesn't go from a junior worker to a senior worker without the time in the trenches grinding and learning fundamentals. There isn't some magical jump in production. So if you say AI will only replace lower level employees eventually there won't be any higher level employees. That is not a good thing.
This claim has been around since before the industrial revolution. People claiming machine X will take our jobs! Yet because of these machines, we have experienced exponential growth rather than no growth. Before these machines, generations of people have lived the same miserable lives as the 10 generations prior. It is on workers to gain skills necessary to make a living. It's not on everybody else to provide it for them.
The fact that low level employees find themselves without any work is not due to automation, but due to stupid government policies such as the minimum wage, payroll taxes, regulations, etc. that push the cost of employment far too high. Low level workers cannot provide their employers enough value to make it worth it worth hiring them. In the old days, a high school graduate alone could make enough by himself to provide a comfortable life for his entire family. Government has made that impossible. Not automation.
Even many "senior" level jobs can be done by high school drop outs with training after 3 months. 90% of these senior jobs are just adult day care as well.texagbeliever said:I think this is patently untrue.aTmAg said:
If it's true that AI is better at a task than a human and at a lower price, then AI SHOULD do it. It will momentarily suck for that human, but in the long run it is better for society as a whole (and that human).
This is the same 150 year argument against automation which has been proven wrong time and time again by reality.
A person doesn't go from a junior worker to a senior worker without the time in the trenches grinding and learning fundamentals. There isn't some magical jump in production. So if you say AI will only replace lower level employees eventually there won't be any higher level employees. That is not a good thing.
It's actually even more meta than that.deddog said:Until AI starts generating promptsBadMoonRisin said:
Not everyone knows how to ask it the right question to get (or at least close) to the right response.
There's a new burgeoning career/job title called a Prompt Engineer. I'd suggest if you're scared you can learn about it.